I'd love to help you with that but I'm wiped out and heading to bed. If you Google "T4i vs SL1" or "T5i vs SL1" you'll find quite a few articles and videos. The T4i is basically the same as the T5i (three minor changes that don't affect much of anything to be honest) so a T5i to SL1 comparison is valid for the T4i.

SL1 vs T5i format:4 FPS vs 5 FPS (25% more FPS)9 AF points with the center being a cross-type point vs 9 AF points with ALL being cross type (VERY significant, IMO)80% AF coverage in live view vs not sure - but substantially less than 80% fixed touch screen vs articulating touch screensmaller/lighter vs larger/heavierfewer shots per battery charge vs more shots per battery chargeflash is less robust (coverage) vs flash is more robust and can be used to control speedlights

When looking at dslr I should consider a sl1 or t4i ... With 18-135 STM lens right ? This would catch fast action and take great continuous shots . Either one will cost around $700 . Man , than eos m for 400 with two lens sure looks appealing to me for everyday use . I'm just afraid ill be let down with blurred photos and missed smiles ;-(

I think you will be very happy with either of these cameras. The SL1 is considerably smaller, which could be an advantage or disadvantage depending on your preference.

The 18-135 STM lens isn't cheap, goes for roughly $550. If that's above your budget, you can probably get by with the 18-55 STM kit lens and can add the longer lens later. You mentioned earlier that you didn't want to change lenses frequently, so the 18-135 would be the ideal option for that.

SL1 vs T5i format:4 FPS vs 5 FPS (25% more FPS)9 AF points with the center being a cross-type point vs 9 AF points with ALL being cross type (VERY significant, IMO)80% AF coverage in live view vs not sure - but substantially less than 80% fixed touch screen vs articulating touch screensmaller/lighter vs larger/heavierfewer shots per battery charge vs more shots per battery chargeflash is less robust (coverage) vs flash is more robust and can be used to control speedlights

I think that's it, but there could be other things. Hope that helps!

I think I would benefit fri, the articulating screen , and with the refurbished deal with 18-135 STM lens at $588 I just don't think I can bet that deal . That being said if I were to add another smaller lens for indoors would a cheap 50mm be ideal ? Or the 18-55mm or 40mm ? @jebrady .... You have been a TON of help thank you for taking the time to help me !!

For indoors, many people find 50mm too "long". Usually, a wider angle is preferred indoors. One option to consider would be an external flash that can be bounced. I have the 430exII. Something you could do is pick up one of those (or similar) and use it for a while, then check and see what focal lengths you're using most often, that would tell you what small prime might work best for you for indoor shots. You're welcome for the help, I'm happy to be of assistance and hope that you find we've all given you a thorough examination of your options!

I think I would benefit fri, the articulating screen , and with the refurbished deal with 18-135 STM lens at $588 I just don't think I can bet that deal .

I agree, I would buy ASAP because these deals sell out fast. The 18-135mm STM is the perfect starter lens due to its wide focal length range as well as its superior performance in video due to the STM. It will be your workhorse.

Quote

hat being said if I were to add another smaller lens for indoors would a cheap 50mm be ideal ? Or the 18-55mm or 40mm ? @jebrady .... You have been a TON of help thank you for taking the time to help me !!

This lens is ideal because it matches the diagonal of the sensor and gives the perfect "normal" field of view for this camera. Meaning it will be like taking pictures as similar to what you see with your own eyes. It is also one of the smallest lenses available and has image stabilization plus constant f/2.8 aperature which helps greatly for indoors low light. The 18-55mm is slower & lower quality than this lens plus is redundant with your 18-135, while the 40mm is too long for indoors and lacks IS.

For indoors, many people find 50mm too "long". Usually, a wider angle is preferred indoors. One option to consider would be an external flash that can be bounced. I have the 430exII. Something you could do is pick up one of those (or similar) and use it for a while, then check and see what focal lengths you're using most often, that would tell you what small prime might work best for you for indoor shots. You're welcome for the help, I'm happy to be of assistance and hope that you find we've all given you a thorough examination of your options!

Yes you all have .

The 70d is just too expensive for my taste ( right now anyway )

The sl1 is the same price as the t4i and lacks some of the functions I would like .. ( the articulating screen, 9 cross points , more fps )

The t5i is a bit more expensive than the t4i ( for no good reason , IMO )

The eos m size it Very appealing to me but I feel I will get more blurred photos than in focus ones , and maybe miss a lot of smiles due to it being slower ....

The t4i seems like my ideal option , paired with the 18-135 STM Lens I will be able to shoot great video . That lens would cost me 400ish , so with the refurb deal I'm getting the body for $200. Ill need to pick up a smaller lens for family gatherings but that shouldn't break the bank ...

Going to do a little more researching before making my decision ... But I've pretty much made my mind up thanks to all the help I found here . Look forward to growing , and being a part of this little community !!!

I think I would benefit fri, the articulating screen , and with the refurbished deal with 18-135 STM lens at $588 I just don't think I can bet that deal .

I agree, I would buy ASAP because these deals sell out fast. The 18-135mm STM is the perfect starter lens due to its wide focal length range as well as its superior performance in video due to the STM. It will be your workhorse.

Quote

hat being said if I were to add another smaller lens for indoors would a cheap 50mm be ideal ? Or the 18-55mm or 40mm ? @jebrady .... You have been a TON of help thank you for taking the time to help me !!

This lens is ideal because it matches the diagonal of the sensor and gives the perfect "normal" field of view for this camera. Meaning it will be like taking pictures as similar to what you see with your own eyes. It is also one of the smallest lenses available and has image stabilization plus constant f/2.8 aperature which helps greatly for indoors low light. The 18-55mm is slower & lower quality than this lens plus is redundant with your 18-135, while the 40mm is too long for indoors and lacks IS.

I think the 28mm 2.8 IS is likely a great lens, but I hesitated to recommend it without knowing more about the amount of light in the OP's house. In my house, 2.8 isn't sufficient to get speeds fast enough to freeze even minor motion at a decent ISO. 2.0 seems to get the job done though. In my house the Canon 28mm 1.8 or Sigma 30mm 1.4 ART would be better solutions. IS is GREAT but if you can't freeze motion you're simply trading one type of blur for another (camera shake vs subject blur). At 28-30mm, the shutter speed to freeze motion (1/60 usually, or higher) will compensate for any normal camera shake. All of that is moot if she prefers a different focal length though, which is why I think an external flash isn't a bad idea. Getting one refurbished at a discount may be very cost effective as well.

Unfortunately Canon has not made an APS-C fast normal lens like Nikon (AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX - $200), so the Sigma prime is the only non-FF option (and isn't significantly cheaper than the Canon options, but does have a 2/3 stop advantage in aperture).

Unfortunately Canon has not made an APS-C fast normal lens like Nikon (AF-S 35mm f/1.8G DX - $200), so the Sigma prime is the only non-FF option (and isn't significantly cheaper than the Canon options, but does have a 2/3 stop advantage in aperture).

How would the cheaper 40mm lens line up ? Not really wanting to spend a ton right now as I'm buying the refurbished kit .. Trying to stay within my budget . I like the small size of the 40mm, any other small cheap options ?

The other lenses you mentioned are good, but this one I would not recommend. Though it is fast, it has severe image quality sacrifices even when stepped down compared to any of the other lenses mentioned. It might be good for a special effect here and there due to the speed, but I would not recommend for a general lens.

The other lenses you mentioned are good, but this one I would not recommend. Though it is fast, it has severe image quality sacrifices even when stepped down compared to any of the other lenses mentioned. It might be good for a special effect here and there due to the speed, but I would not recommend for a general lens.

I've never used it but I've read that most of the image quality sacrifices are on the periphery of the image circle and and thus, when used on a crop sensor those disadvantages are largely negated. Is this true?

How would the cheaper 40mm lens line up ? Not really wanting to spend a ton right now as I'm buying the refurbished kit .. Trying to stay within my budget . I like the small size of the 40mm, any other small cheap options ?

I owned the 40mm on the same camera, and sold it. My thoughts:* Felt cheap, and I was afraid it would break* No IS* The 28mm f/2.8 IS USM which I also owned was barely any larger, better quality images, image stabilization, more sturdy, and more useful focal length for crop cameras.* While the focal length of 40mm is great for full frame camera, it is weird for a crop camera like the one you are buying. For crop you have to multiple the focal length by 1.6 to get the effective field of view, so a 40mm on crop looks like a 64mm on full frame. 64mm is far too long for indoors, yet a bit too short for portrait work. Thus it is not too useful on a crop camera like the one you are buying. You want to stay in the 24mm-35mm range for indoors work with a crop camera, with 28mm being the "normal" sweet spot as it nearly is identical to the sensor diagonal on a 1.6 crop like the one you are getting.

You could try to get a used 28mm f/2.8 non-IS lens, they go for relatively cheap - but it kind of defeats the purpose as the 18-135mm is probably better in image quality than such an old lens. The new 28mm f/2.8 IS version is worlds better in image quality, approaching the quality of $1000+ L-series lenses while being less than half the price.

I would not buy another lens just to buy a lens, you should really look at what would benefit you. Getting a 18-55mm duplicates the 18-135 and doesn't buy you any image quality or speed, and the 40mm is too awkward of a focal length for crop camera like you are buying. A lot of the cheaper lenses are just going to be quality compromises that will likely disappoint you in the long run.

If you cannot afford the 28mm IS USM and want another lens, how about the 55-250 STM? That would be extremely useful for outdoors/telephoto and it is only $349.00. That is one you will keep for a long time to come and not be disappointed in. It is brand new and has image quality that rivals the $1500 70-300L.

Then, when you have some cash saved up, grab the 28mm f/2.8 IS USM for a small lens for higher quality indoor photos.

How would the cheaper 40mm lens line up ? Not really wanting to spend a ton right now as I'm buying the refurbished kit .. Trying to stay within my budget . I like the small size of the 40mm, any other small cheap options ?

I owned the 40mm on the same camera, and sold it. My thoughts:* Felt cheap, and I was afraid it would break* No IS* The 28mm f/2.8 IS USM which I also owned was barely any larger, better quality images, image stabilization, more sturdy, and more useful focal length for crop cameras.* While the focal length of 40mm is great for full frame camera, it is weird for a crop camera like the one you are buying. For crop you have to multiple the focal length by 1.6 to get the effective field of view, so a 40mm on crop looks like a 64mm on full frame. 64mm is far too long for indoors, yet a bit too short for portrait work. Thus it is not too useful on a crop camera like the one you are buying. You want to stay in the 24mm-35mm range for indoors work with a crop camera, with 28mm being the "normal" sweet spot as it nearly is identical to the sensor diagonal on a 1.6 crop like the one you are getting.

You could try to get a used 28mm f/2.8 non-IS lens, they go for relatively cheap - but it kind of defeats the purpose as the 18-135mm is probably better in image quality than such an old lens. The new 28mm f/2.8 IS version is worlds better in image quality, approaching the quality of $1000+ L-series lenses while being less than half the price.

I would not buy another lens just to buy a lens, you should really look at what would benefit you. Getting a 18-55mm duplicates the 18-135 and doesn't buy you any image quality or speed, and the 40mm is too awkward of a focal length for crop camera like you are buying. A lot of the cheaper lenses are just going to be quality compromises that will likely disappoint you in the long run.

If you cannot afford the 28mm IS USM and want another lens, how about the 55-250 STM? That would be extremely useful for outdoors/telephoto and it is only $349.00. That is one you will keep for a long time to come and not be disappointed in. It is brand new and has image quality that rivals the $1500 70-300L.

Then, when you have some cash saved up, grab the 28mm f/2.8 IS USM for a small lens for higher quality indoor photos.

So the 18-135 should be fine for the time being .. I can take head shots and zoom a little ? Maybe ill ask for the 28mm for my bday (in may )

How would the cheaper 40mm lens line up ? Not really wanting to spend a ton right now as I'm buying the refurbished kit .. Trying to stay within my budget . I like the small size of the 40mm, any other small cheap options ?

I owned the 40mm on the same camera, and sold it. My thoughts:* Felt cheap, and I was afraid it would break* No IS* The 28mm f/2.8 IS USM which I also owned was barely any larger, better quality images, image stabilization, more sturdy, and more useful focal length for crop cameras.* While the focal length of 40mm is great for full frame camera, it is weird for a crop camera like the one you are buying. For crop you have to multiple the focal length by 1.6 to get the effective field of view, so a 40mm on crop looks like a 64mm on full frame. 64mm is far too long for indoors, yet a bit too short for portrait work. Thus it is not too useful on a crop camera like the one you are buying. You want to stay in the 24mm-35mm range for indoors work with a crop camera, with 28mm being the "normal" sweet spot as it nearly is identical to the sensor diagonal on a 1.6 crop like the one you are getting.

You could try to get a used 28mm f/2.8 non-IS lens, they go for relatively cheap - but it kind of defeats the purpose as the 18-135mm is probably better in image quality than such an old lens. The new 28mm f/2.8 IS version is worlds better in image quality, approaching the quality of $1000+ L-series lenses while being less than half the price.

I would not buy another lens just to buy a lens, you should really look at what would benefit you. Getting a 18-55mm duplicates the 18-135 and doesn't buy you any image quality or speed, and the 40mm is too awkward of a focal length for crop camera like you are buying. A lot of the cheaper lenses are just going to be quality compromises that will likely disappoint you in the long run.

If you cannot afford the 28mm IS USM and want another lens, how about the 55-250 STM? That would be extremely useful for outdoors/telephoto and it is only $349.00. That is one you will keep for a long time to come and not be disappointed in. It is brand new and has image quality that rivals the $1500 70-300L.

Then, when you have some cash saved up, grab the 28mm f/2.8 IS USM for a small lens for higher quality indoor photos.

So the 18-135 should be fine for the time being .. I can take head shots and zoom a little ? Maybe ill ask for the 28mm for my bday (in may )